Distributed map with entries removed when the entry creator dies

13 views
Skip to first unread message

ant

unread,
Jan 1, 2010, 3:49:04 PM1/1/10
to Hazelcast
Just come across Hazelcast, looks great and could be just what i'm
looking for, but not quite sure from a quick skim of the doc. I want a
distributed map, where nodes are configured to discover each other
with either multcast and/or explicit ip addresses, and map entries
that were added by a node get removed when the node disappears. Eg:

nodeA -multcast- nodeB -explicitIP- nodeC -aSeparateMulticastGroup-
nodeD -explicitIP- nodeE

and all nodes can see all the map entries added by any node and if any
node disappears then the map entries it has added get removed.

Can Hazelcast be made to do something like this? Happy to write some
extra code if most of that is already available.

TIA

...ant

ant elder

unread,
Jan 2, 2010, 5:51:57 AM1/2/10
to Hazelcast

Can Hazelcast be configured to use both multicast and ip addresses at
the same time? For example should i be able to start one Hazelcast
instance with multicast disabled and another with both multicast and
explicit ip addresses and have them be part of the same cluster? I've
been trying to do this in a simple testcase [1] without success, is
this a limitation or a config problem in my code?

...ant

[1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany/sandbox/endpoint-hazelcast/src/test/java/org/apache/tuscany/sca/endpoint/hazelcast/RegistryTestCase.java

Talip Ozturk

unread,
Jan 2, 2010, 6:00:16 PM1/2/10
to hazelcast
cannot be both. either multicast or tcp/ip.

-talip

> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hazelcast" group.
> To post to this group, send email to haze...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to hazelcast+...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hazelcast?hl=en.
>
>
>

ant elder

unread,
Jan 3, 2010, 9:20:05 AM1/3/10
to haze...@googlegroups.com
Would you be open to having that changed and how big a change do you
think it would likely be to fix it - is the current either or approach
deep across the code or would it just be a few tweaks here and there?
Supporting both multicast and tcp/ip at the same time would be really
helpful for us.

...ant

Talip Ozturk

unread,
Jan 3, 2010, 10:24:46 AM1/3/10
to hazelcast
shouldn't be that hard. please add this as an issue.
http://code.google.com/p/hazelcast/issues/list

-talip

ant elder

unread,
Jan 6, 2010, 7:18:57 AM1/6/10
to haze...@googlegroups.com
That would be fantastic, i'll add an issue now.

And by the way echoing Gabriels comments on the pic storage thread -
great work, Hazelcast really is a pleasure to use compared to similar
toolkits, i've got it running as the distribution technology in Apache
Tuscany and Hazelcast made it really easy to do.

...ant

Talip Ozturk

unread,
Mar 29, 2010, 4:21:08 AM3/29/10
to haze...@googlegroups.com
> great work, Hazelcast really is a pleasure to use compared to similar
> toolkits, i've got it running as the distribution technology in Apache
> Tuscany and Hazelcast made it really easy to do.
>
>   ...ant

Ant,

Can we publish this on our new Testimonials page?

Thanks,
-talip

ant elder

unread,
Mar 31, 2010, 3:19:35 PM3/31/10
to haze...@googlegroups.com

Sure ok, that would be fine.

...ant

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages